• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Laura MF Fryer: Highguard's Collapse: Echoes of Concord

Cyberpunkd

Cyberpunkd

Member
Our honorary GAF Lady comes with a new video dropping truth bombs:



AI summary below:

What happens in Highguard's launch

  • Highguard, a free‑to‑play 3v3 hero shooter from ex‑Apex/Titanfall devs, launched with about 97,000 concurrent Steam players on day one, boosted by a big Game Awards finale slot and crossplay on PC, PlayStation, and Xbox.
  • Within days, concurrent players fell by roughly 85–90% to around 10–11k, and Steam reviews turned "mostly negative," with players citing bland characters, slow pacing on large maps, and performance bugs.

Main reasons the game stumbled

  • The creator argues Highguard lacks aspirational heroes: characters with immediate style, personality, and fantasy, similar to Apex Legends, that make players want to "be" them; instead, Highguard's roster feels generic and forgettable.
  • The studio tried an Apex‑style "shadow drop" without a large QA army or public beta, relying on a team of about 100 at a self‑publishing indie, so issues like weak characters and performance problems weren't caught or iterated on before launch.

The role of hype and today's market

  • Geoff Keighley championed the game and gave it a free Game Awards finale slot, which massively inflated expectations but also made any flaws more visible when the game finally released.
  • The video contrasts 2019's Apex launch—fewer high‑quality F2P competitors, huge internal testing resources—with 2026's crowded space (Apex, Valorant, Overwatch 2, Marvel Rivals, Ark Raiders, etc.), where players sample a new game for 20–30 minutes and quickly bounce if pacing, polish, or characters don't click.

Lessons about feedback and culture

  • The key lesson is the need for a robust feedback loop: internal play, external playtests/early access, and especially real player reactions to refine characters, pacing, and performance before and after launch.
  • The creator references a previous "culture killed Concord" video and notes that internal bubbles and studio culture can block hard feedback; with Highguard, there were clear red flags in trailers and early gameplay that weren't sufficiently addressed.

Outlook for Highguard

  • Because Wildlight is a self‑funded indie with private investment, the video suggests they may have more runway to listen, iterate, and potentially pivot the game's direction over time.
  • The closing message is cautiously optimistic: Highguard's rough start shows how fast fortunes can change in live service games, but the "story isn't over" if the team embraces player feedback and is willing to adapt.

I would definitely agree about feedback loop, extensive internal and external tests, involving the community in co-creating your game, showing them you listen to their feedback. Do, don't tell.
 
Last edited:
Gonzito said:
Did The Professor work in Highguard too?
Click to expand...
That's not her point at all - it's mostly two points: lack of aspirational characters, woke or not. Highguard's heroes are bland AF. Second - extensive playtest and feedback loop: the game launched with performance problems + some of the design decisions could've been avoided if the community had an input e.g. 3v3 is niche.
 
Cyberpunkd said:
That's not her point at all - it's mostly two points: lack of aspirational characters, woke or not. Highguard's heroes are bland AF. Second - extensive playtest and feedback loop: the game launched with performance problems + some of the design decisions could've been avoided if the community had an input e.g. 3v3 is niche.
Click to expand...

Man it was just a joke. Dont take me so seriously lol
 
Cyberpunkd said:
Our honorary GAF Lady comes with a new video dropping truth bombs:
Click to expand...

who-dat.gif
 
I should be making these obvious videos and making money in my opinion. But the market is so saturated with opinions it's hard to stand out unless I'm already in or have huge tits.

Sums up highgayrd
 
Any1 with at least 3 braincells knew right away game gonna flop hard af, tells u enough about what kind of individuals are in decision making spots there at the dev studio.
And wtf is that gaslighting about "private investor/ selfpublished indie" and 100 ppl working on it, or free final trailer of TGA spot, even if geoff does charity, which is hard to believe with his sleazy personality, it defo isnt 10m usd worth of final trailer spot charity.

Somebody had to pay north of 100m usd for making this game- its veteran western dev studio with 6figure salaries, which are standard , and somebody had to compensate geoff for giving them best trailer spot of most recent TGA show.

Key lessons- same like with concord- dont make shit game coz even if u market it as 2nd coming of jesus players will sniff out ur blatant lie faster than ur pup sniffs out ur fart :messenger_tears_of_joy:

We will keep seeing those shitty games being made till fortnite dies out, same way we saw "wow-killer" mmorpgs from every1 and their momma when WoW was at its peak, investors/dev studios are willing to risk it all in hopes of making fortnite money, but guess what- there wont be another fortnite ever same like there was never mmorpg who got even close to WoW peak numbers- and plz dont bring up ff14, im final fantasy lover but thats 2 tiers below peak wow in terms of financial success/status, same like arc raiders/valorant are 2 tiers below fortnite, just look at commercials/colabs WoW or nowadays fortnie can afford to make ;)
 
You know, it's a bit funny that things have flipped for multiplayer and single player.

During the PS360 gen for nearly every single player game, the big question would be 'so does it have a multiplayer mode?'

Now I feel like we are on the opposite end this gen, where people are curious about a game but then ask 'so does it have single player? or campaign?'

Some of these PvP games do genuinely look like they could be fun to play, have a unique story, and even have some fun character mechanics.

Highguard. Splitgate. Concord. Maybe Marathon too who knows.

But they refuse to put any of their cool ideas in a competent campaign mode. Especially Splitgate, which would easily be an insanely cool campaign to play with the portal-shooter shenanigans.

I'd love to blow up walls while on weird alien horse creatures to go pick up a super sword and capture a tower while finding cool guns to loot…in a campaign mode. Concord had some weirdly cool alien lore and worldbuilding lore…Campaign mode please. Marathon's lore, level, and objective setup sound fun…campaign mode please.

This goldrush of multiplayer games is all just a big gamble anyway. Why not raise the stakes with a better hand?
 
Cyberpunkd said:
The studio tried an Apex‑style "shadow drop" without a large QA army or public beta, relying on a team of about 100 at a self‑publishing indie, so issues like weak characters and performance problems weren't caught or iterated on before launch.
Click to expand...
This part. Keep screaming this part out.

Almost getting to the point where if one of these games do not have a few rounds of public play tests to collect feedback and iterate based on those feedback, I'm not touching it.

Saw that with Concord. Almost saw it with marathon. Hoping we don't see it with Fairgames. Crowd sourcing feedback on an MP game is one of the most no brainer things you can do in this industry.
 
i forgot this game existed, if not because this thread, i might never knew there is any new failed multiplayer game lately
 
March Climber said:
You know, it's a bit funny that things have flipped for multiplayer and single player.

During the PS360 gen for nearly every single player game, the big question would be 'so does it have a multiplayer mode?'

Now I feel like we are on the opposite end this gen, where people are curious about a game but then ask 'so does it have single player? or campaign?'

Some of these PvP games do genuinely look like they could be fun to play, have a unique story, and even have some fun character mechanics.

Highguard. Splitgate. Concord. Maybe Marathon too who knows.

But they refuse to put any of their cool ideas in a competent campaign mode. Especially Splitgate, which would easily be an insanely cool campaign to play with the portal-shooter shenanigans.

I'd love to blow up walls while on weird alien horse creatures to go pick up a super sword and capture a tower while finding cool guns to loot…in a campaign mode. Concord had some weirdly cool alien lore and worldbuilding lore…Campaign mode please. Marathon's lore, level, and objective setup sound fun…campaign mode please.

This goldrush of multiplayer games is all just a big gamble anyway. Why not raise the stakes with a better hand?
Click to expand...

Yep, alot of games would be better recieved if they had a single player mode/campaign, even if smaller and simpler than that traditional SP campaigns.
Well it would eliminate people complaining about MP only games
Concord would of not been hated as much if it had better character design and a campaign/story mode, the gunplay itself was more than fine and not worse than alot of current successful games.

Marathon too, even if it had a simple small campaign mode, to set players up for the main Extraction mode where the story carries on etc. That would kill alot of the hate it gets
I'll be there day 1 anyway, but extraction games are intense for me, it will be 2-3 times a week play for a couple hours most each time
 
Last edited:
Can I have a hot take? Apex Legends characters look like crap too, the game just had the perfect launch timing and less competition. If it had released today I think we would all be saying different things about it.
 
Last edited:
Cyberpunkd said:
Our honorary GAF Lady comes with a new video dropping truth bombs:



AI summary below:

What happens in Highguard's launch

  • Highguard, a free‑to‑play 3v3 hero shooter from ex‑Apex/Titanfall devs, launched with about 97,000 concurrent Steam players on day one, boosted by a big Game Awards finale slot and crossplay on PC, PlayStation, and Xbox.
  • Within days, concurrent players fell by roughly 85–90% to around 10–11k, and Steam reviews turned "mostly negative," with players citing bland characters, slow pacing on large maps, and performance bugs.

Main reasons the game stumbled

  • The creator argues Highguard lacks aspirational heroes: characters with immediate style, personality, and fantasy, similar to Apex Legends, that make players want to "be" them; instead, Highguard's roster feels generic and forgettable.
  • The studio tried an Apex‑style "shadow drop" without a large QA army or public beta, relying on a team of about 100 at a self‑publishing indie, so issues like weak characters and performance problems weren't caught or iterated on before launch.

The role of hype and today's market

  • Geoff Keighley championed the game and gave it a free Game Awards finale slot, which massively inflated expectations but also made any flaws more visible when the game finally released.
  • The video contrasts 2019's Apex launch—fewer high‑quality F2P competitors, huge internal testing resources—with 2026's crowded space (Apex, Valorant, Overwatch 2, Marvel Rivals, Ark Raiders, etc.), where players sample a new game for 20–30 minutes and quickly bounce if pacing, polish, or characters don't click.

Lessons about feedback and culture

  • The key lesson is the need for a robust feedback loop: internal play, external playtests/early access, and especially real player reactions to refine characters, pacing, and performance before and after launch.
  • The creator references a previous "culture killed Concord" video and notes that internal bubbles and studio culture can block hard feedback; with Highguard, there were clear red flags in trailers and early gameplay that weren't sufficiently addressed.

Outlook for Highguard

  • Because Wildlight is a self‑funded indie with private investment, the video suggests they may have more runway to listen, iterate, and potentially pivot the game's direction over time.
  • The closing message is cautiously optimistic: Highguard's rough start shows how fast fortunes can change in live service games, but the "story isn't over" if the team embraces player feedback and is willing to adapt.

I would definitely agree about feedback loop, extensive internal and external tests, involving the community in co-creating your game, showing them you listen to their feedback. Do, don't tell.
Click to expand...

She forgot to mention a lot of people decided to hate the game in advance for no reason other than wishing to see the devs failing.

 
Last edited:
Hindsight is 20/20, the problem with trying to raise issues to publishers is you've got this absolute monopolistic cultural wall in Reddit, games press and elsewhere violently drowning out any attempt to highlight issues in favour of raw marketing. At some point people are tired of being attacked by echo chambers and drop giving meaningful feedback altogether, ending in ruin.
 
Last edited:
Cyberpunkd said:
Our honorary GAF Lady comes with a new video dropping truth bombs:



AI summary below:

What happens in Highguard's launch

  • Highguard, a free‑to‑play 3v3 hero shooter from ex‑Apex/Titanfall devs, launched with about 97,000 concurrent Steam players on day one, boosted by a big Game Awards finale slot and crossplay on PC, PlayStation, and Xbox.
  • Within days, concurrent players fell by roughly 85–90% to around 10–11k, and Steam reviews turned "mostly negative," with players citing bland characters, slow pacing on large maps, and performance bugs.

Main reasons the game stumbled

  • The creator argues Highguard lacks aspirational heroes: characters with immediate style, personality, and fantasy, similar to Apex Legends, that make players want to "be" them; instead, Highguard's roster feels generic and forgettable.
  • The studio tried an Apex‑style "shadow drop" without a large QA army or public beta, relying on a team of about 100 at a self‑publishing indie, so issues like weak characters and performance problems weren't caught or iterated on before launch.

The role of hype and today's market

  • Geoff Keighley championed the game and gave it a free Game Awards finale slot, which massively inflated expectations but also made any flaws more visible when the game finally released.
  • The video contrasts 2019's Apex launch—fewer high‑quality F2P competitors, huge internal testing resources—with 2026's crowded space (Apex, Valorant, Overwatch 2, Marvel Rivals, Ark Raiders, etc.), where players sample a new game for 20–30 minutes and quickly bounce if pacing, polish, or characters don't click.

Lessons about feedback and culture

  • The key lesson is the need for a robust feedback loop: internal play, external playtests/early access, and especially real player reactions to refine characters, pacing, and performance before and after launch.
  • The creator references a previous "culture killed Concord" video and notes that internal bubbles and studio culture can block hard feedback; with Highguard, there were clear red flags in trailers and early gameplay that weren't sufficiently addressed.

Outlook for Highguard

  • Because Wildlight is a self‑funded indie with private investment, the video suggests they may have more runway to listen, iterate, and potentially pivot the game's direction over time.
  • The closing message is cautiously optimistic: Highguard's rough start shows how fast fortunes can change in live service games, but the "story isn't over" if the team embraces player feedback and is willing to adapt.

I would definitely agree about feedback loop, extensive internal and external tests, involving the community in co-creating your game, showing them you listen to their feedback. Do, don't tell.
Click to expand...

Highguard failed because it lacked "aspirational characters"? What a load of crap.

6b3c1fc81f721d900bc907a611052edf.jpg


XR7iXudf93FQtKVnEyTdjB.jpg


chess-set-silicone-black-camel-both-pieces-1500x1160__93678.1623246934.jpg


Beta-and-Seasonal-Unlocks.webp
 
Last edited:
Gotham City Imposters was really good.

Another really good FPS I think this applies to - Shadowrun.

PeteBull said:
Any1 with at least 3 braincells knew right away game gonna flop hard af, tells u enough about what kind of individuals are in decision making spots there at the dev studio.
And wtf is that gaslighting about "private investor/ selfpublished indie" and 100 ppl working on it, or free final trailer of TGA spot, even if geoff does charity, which is hard to believe with his sleazy personality, it defo isnt 10m usd worth of final trailer spot charity.

Somebody had to pay north of 100m usd for making this game- its veteran western dev studio with 6figure salaries, which are standard , and somebody had to compensate geoff for giving them best trailer spot of most recent TGA show.

Key lessons- same like with concord- dont make shit game coz even if u market it as 2nd coming of jesus players will sniff out ur blatant lie faster than ur pup sniffs out ur fart :messenger_tears_of_joy:

We will keep seeing those shitty games being made till fortnite dies out, same way we saw "wow-killer" mmorpgs from every1 and their momma when WoW was at its peak, investors/dev studios are willing to risk it all in hopes of making fortnite money, but guess what- there wont be another fortnite ever same like there was never mmorpg who got even close to WoW peak numbers- and plz dont bring up ff14, im final fantasy lover but thats 2 tiers below peak wow in terms of financial success/status, same like arc raiders/valorant are 2 tiers below fortnite, just look at commercials/colabs WoW or nowadays fortnie can afford to make ;)
Click to expand...
Yea, it's like "indie" has become a selling point so these massive games with huge staffs try to call themselves "indie".
 
Last edited:
Generic said:
for no reason
Click to expand...


The reasons have been stated many times and also in this woman's video. People saw another ultrageneric hero shooter with the same drawbacks as previous ones like Concord or Bleeding Edge (yeah, that thing once existed).

I don't agree with being harsh to devs unless they open fire first. However, being critical of the game after its reveal is not unfair.
 
Cyberpunkd said:
I am not sure, I admit I don't play MP games.
Click to expand...
I don't mean to offend you because you're probably discussing in good faith but I think this is the problem with the discourse.

Laura Fryer isn't a PvP gamer but she latched on to the "aspirational characters" argument and stuck with it. PvP gamers do not care about what our characters look like. Valorant has lame looking characters. Team Fortress 2 has lame looking characters. All these games have lame looking characters.

 
Men_in_Boxes said:
Why?
Click to expand...


Heroes must look cool. It's a mandatory condition. They may or not be sexy, but coolness is a primary factor. The problem is that many devs, for ideological and/or personal reasons, have no notion of what is cool. Besides, they don't ask for opinions outside their bubble, exacerbating the problem.

To me it's funny how in the last Marathon promotions they are using the least ugly character of the lot, as if they realized how badly they have been promoting themselves so far.
 
Last edited:
if you can't understand the difference between the characters in Valorant (legit great) or something like Concord then there is no point in talking about it

playvalorant.com

Agents

Riot Games presents VALORANT: a 5v5 character-based tactical FPS where precise gunplay meets unique agent abilities. Learn about VALORANT and its stylish cast
playvalorant.com playvalorant.com

If you don't understand why there are thousands of memes featuring the TF2 cast and film shorts and how Valve has kept the same design and cast for 20 years and everyone still loves them, then well you will never get it.
 
Last edited:
diffusionx said:
Gotham City Imposters was really good.

Another really good FPS I think this applies to - Shadowrun.


Yea, it's like "indie" has become a selling point so these massive games with huge staffs try to call themselves "indie".
Click to expand...
God man, both games were so much damn fun and SO underrated. I had Shadowrun on SNES, so when I saw the game on 360 I was excited, but then I saw it and had my reservations. But then I played it, and absolutely loved it. Dwarf hang gliding with a minigun was very special, lol.
diffusionx said:
I'd recommend stepping away, that dude thinks TF2 has crap character design lmao
Click to expand...
I didn't know this until earlier this week, and it really puts things into perspective, lol. I've adored TF2 since its release and all my "well, he ain't so bad" feelings when right out the window, lmao.
 
Men_in_Boxes said:
And yet, there are tons of successful GAAS games with non aspirational characters to play as.
Click to expand...
And even those games have a cosmetic battle pass dress up shop. "pvp players" seem to care a lot about playing barbie with their characters actually

but specifically hero shooters, really cool character designs help sell the game a lot
 
Last edited:
Cyberpunkd said:
where players sample a new game for 20–30 minutes and quickly bounce if pacing, polish, or characters don't click.
Click to expand...

Ah, the PS syndrome strikes again. When it was so easy to pirate a game people tried it for just a few minutes and then continued with the next iso if it didn't felt special.
 
diffusionx said:
And even those games have a cosmetic battle pass dress up shop. "pvp players" seem to care a lot about playing barbie with their characters actually
Click to expand...
Right, but most of those games started out with non aspirations characters which would suggest it's not a requirement for the genre.
diffusionx said:
but specifically hero shooters, really cool character designs help sell the game a lot
Click to expand...
I disagree. Too many of these games started off with weak characters. It's clearly not that important.
 
diffusionx said:
you don't understand the difference between a weak and good character though, opinion disregarded.
Click to expand...
Nobody here would be able to seperate the starting characters from 20 popular hero shooters and group them into what games will be hits and what wouldn't.

PvP gamers are mechanics and game design oriented. You think people are playing Rust because the base characters cloth underwear is "aspirational"?
 
Men_in_Boxes said:
Nobody here would be able to seperate the starting characters from 20 popular hero shooters and group them into what games will be hits and what wouldn't.

PvP gamers are mechanics and game design oriented. You think people are playing Rust because the base characters cloth underwear is "aspirational"?
Click to expand...
isn't rust a survival game? you dont understand that this game would have a different appeal from valorant?
 
diffusionx said:
isn't rust a survival game? you dont understand that this game would have a different appeal from valorant?
Click to expand...
I forgot, you think aspirational characters only matter in a 5v5 setting for some reason.

(Despite everyone who plays Rust has also played one or two hero shooters in their day)
 
Men_in_Boxes said:
I forgot, you think aspirational characters only matter in a 5v5 setting for some reason.

(Despite everyone who plays Rust has also played one or two hero shooters in their day)
Click to expand...
yes, I do think good character design matters more in some games than others.

For example, I don't think anyone is playing Madden looking for cool characters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Laura Fryer - When Fun Was the Mission at Xbox
2 3 4 5
234
352
mckmas8808 replied
Laura Fryer - Can Double Fine Survive the Cold Equations of Xbox?
Opinion  2
72
350
Cyberpunkd replied
Laura Fryer - The Bubble Club vs ARC Raiders
2
93
958
clarky replied
[Laura Fryer] The Future of Xbox
6 7 8 9 10
454
7K
Team Andromeda replied
Laura Fryer - My thoughts on Game Pass
Opinion  2
71
827
ecosse_011172 replied
Top Bottom